Catherine, Princess of Wales, announces she has completed her chemotherapy treatment

You know what? I’m glad. She seems like a decent person and it’s a horrible, scary disease to happen to anyone.

Happy days are here again.

Good for her. I hope she's really free of it and doesn't suffer any lasting complications from treatment.

God save Princess Kate.

Great news. I wish her all the best.

Wonderful video! Gave my cold heart some feels.

What a great vid!!!!

Pity.

No one asks if I’m okay!

I suspect she will reveal the type of cancer she's had in time. It will be a while, but I do think she will be more open about it with this video being the first step. I suspect she will become a great support to those fighting cancer in the UK. King Charles is the current Patron of Macmillan, but I wouldn't be surprised if Catherine takes it on at some stage when she's ready to.

I wonder, R11. I was thinking she might not ever say, while I was watching the video. If it's something like cervical cancer, which can be sex- and HPV-related, it would open up unsavory speculation.

The video is so stagey and artificial.

It reminds me of nothing so much as a television ad for a medication--all it needed was a smooth jazz soundtrack and for an announcer to list possible dangerous symptoms after taking the medication.

This sounds ominous to me.

[quote] Doing what I can to stay cancer free is now my focus. Although I have finished chemotherapy, my path to healing and full recovery is long and I must continue to take each day as it comes.

Did you catch my “I’m just an innocent little girl happy to be with her loving family” act?

Pretty convincing, right?

Thanks for your support.

Here’s to a brighter tomorrow.

Yes, the video goes on for too long; too many shots of the same things, meant to look pretty but convey almost nothing, and I agree that her words toward the end sound ominous. Realistically, there's no update (however vague) at this stage that could truthfully convey reassurance, because that's the nature of all cancer treatment except the must cut-and-dried (pardon the expression) ones like skin cancer. Still, she sounds like a patient who has been told that long-term survival odds aren't that encouraging. I hope to be proved wrong.

*most,* not *must*

R14 She still has to lose all the cancer bloat, after all. But one day at a time.

Pretty frautastic video, but good news all the same.

[quote]If it's something like cervical cancer, which can be sex- and HPV-related, it would open up unsavory speculation.

Well...

Was it tit or cunt cancer?

R21 Wouldn't know. Never vist either place.

Agree with R13. The video is the moving image equivalent of Canva-generated "graphic design" for frauen who own hand-made candle shops. Or Taylor Swift's "Folklore" album.

[quote] If it's something like cervical cancer, which can be sex- and HPV-related, it would open up unsavory speculation.

Interesting . . .

The ending wasn't ominous. The woman doesn't want to go back to work full time, ever. Now she has the perfect excuse in perpetuity. The pointlessness and fakery of it probably gave her cancer in the first place.

You think raising two future Kings, a hyperactive brat and a pint-sized psychopath isn’t work?

R25 only a truly nasty cunt would say something like that. You must be a bitter, angry piece of shit and I bet you have spent your whole life unloved and unliked. You are simply a waste of space. You will be missed by nobody.

the video at R6 is lovely. She has dealt with this crisis beautifully. I especially liked the video she did to shut down the idiotic conspiracy theories about that family pic that she corrected before posting. She seems like a great mom and I hope she lives to a ripe, old age cancer free.

Mary!

Good for her. Dealing with cancer, no matter who you are, is scary as hell.

[quote]r12 = If it's something like cervical cancer, which can be sex- and HPV-related, it would open up unsavory speculation.

This appears more serious than cervical cancer. I hope it isn't ovarian.

R27 Pot/kettle.

Love her! Good news.

Somewhere in Montecito, a jam jar shatters after being thrown against a bland but tasteful marble kitchen island. Soon after, a blood-curdling scream…

This is a message board populated mainly by jaded Gen-X gay men, and the way some of you lap up this sappiness surprises me. A woman with access to the best healthcare in the world is done with her treatments and sends out I'm okay messages akin to a Facebook post. Where are all the funny reads? Oh well. Carry on.

r35 has obviously never had a cancer diagnosis in his family.

[quote]This is a message board populated mainly by jaded Gen-X gay men

No, it isn't.

Nice free trips for treatment, I drove myself to each and every treatment, just for spreading her legs for a good for nothing. Aren't we beyond this

[quote]the video at [R6] is lovely.

I was thinking that too - whoever does their media does a helluva job. It's tasteful - she looks lovely, but not overly made up and everyone looks & acts natural, not stilted. Clearly intended to be poignant, but not overly maudlin.

It's good to see she's making a comeback; the radio silence was a bit worrisome, so it's good to hear that she's planning some degree of return to normalcy.

If nobody loves you, r37, then perhaps you're the problem.

William looks especially ugly. Nice body though. Kudos to his trainer.

r27, it sounds like you need to work things out with your anger therapist.

Tough crowd!

[quote]Tough crowd!

Anonymous trolls are not known for being tough...hence the anonymous part.

I, for one, am sure all those WWs on r27,28 and 30 are entirely organic and come from unique readers moved by their eloquence to endorse their lovely sentiments.

R44, it's more a reflection on you that you find it hard to believe that people could have any empathy for someone who's had cancer treatment.

In the beginning of this mess, they announced she was having "abdominal" surgery that would have a lengthy recovery period. So... unless it was already Stage 4, it couldn't be cervical cancer.

But "abdominal" could cover ovarian, stomach, intestinal, maybe colon cancer? What else - pancreas? They're all pretty scary, with colon cancer having the best odds (I think)

They played this all wrong from the very beginning and then used cancer as a way to get out of the hole they dug for themselves and guilt people into feeling bad for questioning the way they handled this. All they had to do was follow Charles' example, but they didn't.

Oh my god, if R46 is attempting to kick off yet another round of "let's speculate what kind of cancer Kate has while sharing personal anecdotes of every vaguely similar kind of cancer had by family members, work colleagues, and past pet groomers" I will shoot myself.

She is someone who is greatly beloved.

The first doctor that Sky News had on for commentary after her March video statement was shown said it was colon cancer. The doc had no personal involvement with Kate, but could clearly tell from the little information that was out that that that's what it was.

[quote] I, for one, am sure all those WWs on [R27],28 and 30 are entirely organic and come from unique readers moved by their eloquence to endorse their lovely sentiments.

I just now gave r27, r28, and r30 each a WW. People care about Catherine.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Meghan is babbling incoherently while Harry prepares a sedative injection. Good.

I’m glad she’s doing better.

I believe she has Crohn’s disease (part of the reason she is so incredibly thin.) Sometimes treatment for Crohn’s disease involves removing parts of the intestine that are chronically inflamed, to help with symptoms. I think that was the planned abdominal surgery.

Then, when they went in, they found cancer in her intestines and needed to treat for that.

My husband is a doctor and this is his theory.

Daily Mail is coincidentally running a top headline story about colon cancer in young people....

Colon makes sense: "More than half of new cases of cancer in females are breast, lung or bowel cancer, 2017-2019, UK." while "More than half of new cases of cancer in males are prostate, lung or bowel cancer, 2017-2019, UK."

R54, to be fair, Daily Mail runs articles about young people and cancer constantly. Drives fear and clicks. Though in this case it might be tied to PoW, it is a pretty normal thing for them to be running.

^The article is the leading headline at the very top of the page and that's what stood out to me.....

What is the point of discussing your cancer diagnosis and recovery but yet refusing to disclose the kind of cancer you have. The royal family are such weirdos to a degree. King Charles isn’t but the kids are. Shit is fkin weird and borderline offensive.

Why do you need to know?

R59 But then why discuss it at all. What shame is there in the public knowing what type of cancer you have as we are championing and cheering for a rousing successful recovery. It could make someone having the same type of cancer have more hope. That’s because there is some type of pretension behind it and she probably got cancer from Prince William being a whore.

Anyone know if there is a GoFundMe page?

Glad she’s recovered. And that her sweet kids seem to be coping. Clearly she won’t be doing too much in the future beyond attending the mens Wimbledon final and her Christmas concert.

But that video is awful with the cheesy costume changes and organised frolicking. It’s like a commercial for a feminine hygiene product made to air on the Lifetime networked and edited with Canva.

The announcement is vague beyond necessary. All it says is she has completed chemotherapy,

[quote] The first doctor that Sky News had on for commentary after her March video statement was shown said it was colon cancer. The doc had no personal involvement with Kate, but could clearly tell from the little information that was out that that that's what it was.

Makes sense about the oddball cloak and dagger secrecy about her illness, if there is a possibility she had a stoma for a few months and didn’t feel confident walking around in public with it (which no one should feel shame about but, we’re talking Kate Middleton here).

LOVE Kate and hoping for a truly full recovery but here's a question:

It looks like all of her beautiful hair in the video is hers. If she'd lost it via chemotherapy was there really time for it to grow to that extraordinary length? Just wondering if she went through some kind of "localized" chemo that wouldn't affect her hair, if there even is such a thing?

In my eyes, Catherine, Princess of Wales hasn't set one high-heeled, nude color pumps foot wrong. I'm one of her biggest DL stans.

So, it's saying something when I agree with r13, r23, r62.

I think it would have been so much more effective if she had gone back to the same setting of where she announced her cancer and just as forthrightly said what she said here.

I enjoy cheapo Hallmark and Lifetime moves, the cornier, the better, but I don't want the same effect from a Kensington Palace announcement.

I'm surprised Catherine OK'd this, unless the presence of William and the children is meant to divert from more serious stuff that they absolutely want to keep private.

That's the only explanation I can think of for releasing this awkward treacle.

Thank you, R1. You are a decent chap. Any chance you're a single, gay guy? If so, perhaps Muriel can fix us up.

R64 Colon cancer eh. That’s what Chadwick Boseman died from. Colon cancer is on the rise amongst us young people. Makes you wonder what they are putting in our food.

Kiss Me Kate!

Have we read anywhere that the Markles wish Kate well?

And less than 2 hours later, this was released.

[quote]What is the point of discussing your cancer diagnosis and recovery but yet refusing to disclose the kind of cancer you have.

You're a loon. The last time I had cancer, I told co-workers I had it but didn't disclose what kind. Where the cancer was located was irrelevant. The only thing important was that I had cancer and was having daily radiation plus chemotherapy.

Like clockwork R71!

[quote]And less than 2 hours later, this was released.

The comments in response on X about Netflix and the Sussexes are brutal, and well-deserved.

I thought that Archewell was the Harkles' charity front / momeny laundering scam?

*money laundering

A few comments from the British peanut gallery:

Mawkish. I find it gross and insulting to the enormous health inequalities and struggles millions face. Nothing inspirational or touching about it at all.

I was waiting for William to say something really cringy while giving Kate a piggy back ride.

Oh my! It feels like an advert to join a cult, or for sanitary products in parts.

It’s an absolute self indulgent wank fest.

The video looks like the Twilight films.

Are William and Kate Scientologists now?

I think it was a “soft” way,of indicating to the public that she won’t return to public duties in the same way again. ----So she's going to do even less than before? Good grief.

Judging from the video, she has cancer of either the fern or the log.

[quote] What is the point of discussing your cancer diagnosis and recovery but yet refusing to disclose the kind of cancer you have. The royal family are such weirdos to a degree. King Charles isn’t but the kids are. Shit is fkin weird and borderline offensive.

But Charles hasn't reveal what kind of cancer he has, either, has he?

R79 It's prostate.

He has cancer that was identified while he was undergoing surgery for an enlarged prostate. The type of cancer has not been revealed.

[quote]R12 If it's something like cervical cancer, which can be sex- and HPV-related, it would open up unsavory speculation.

Does the Hanbury Woman have either of those?

That's what I thought, R81. People have guessed pancreatic, which is a killer, or kidney, also pretty damned bad.

R81 Oops, you're right. I forgot we were all guessing what kind of cancer he had too.

R72 But you aren’t a public figure. They are releasing videos to be seen for mainstream consumption. There IS a difference.

R77 The British peanut gallery is right. This video is so tone death.

[quote]Why do you need to know?

No one needs to know. But notice how no one knows what type of cancer Charles has, but he's not getting the same kind of smoke. It's called understanding how to deal with the public and not whatever the fuck is going on at the Wales house.

King Charles is not milking his cancer the same way and he is 80 something years old. They are just so fraudulent and fake.

[quote] Oh my god, if [R46] is attempting to kick off yet another round of "let's speculate what kind of cancer Kate has while sharing personal anecdotes of every vaguely similar kind of cancer had by family members, work colleagues, and past pet groomers" I will shoot myself.

Do you promise?

[quote] The announcement is vague beyond necessary. All it says is she has completed chemotherapy,

Which means, at best, the prognosis is guarded.

R86

The British peanut gallery is right. This video is so tone death.

Ohhhhh!!! Does this mean they’ve given up on poor, dear Catherine?

Maybe the video was more for their kids than anyone else? To give their kids hope and show them how optimistic they are? I imagine they are trying to make as many positive memories as possible personally and publicly.

No need to trouble yourself with preparing a black mourning outfit, Smegs.

If and when the time comes, you will be stopped at Customs before you even make it out of the airport.

The video is eerie and has the air of a posthumous tribute.

Must be time for the wig obsessives to stop by.

If it is colon cancer, chemotherapy is only used for advanced stages. Otherwise, treatment is surgical.

R95 agreed. I take back everything I stated if she dies within the next year. Pancreatic cancer is very tough to fight. All the millions in the world can’t save you.

[quote]This video is so tone death.

Careful, your slip is showing.

She has said that her chemotherapy is done and that she is cancer free but it will never be enough for some of you ghouls.

There is a divide among people who regard health information as the most private possible information and those who don’t. For many, it seems to be a deeply-held gut feeling (no pun intended). They get upset at the very idea that anyone, even a figurehead like the Princess of Wales, should talk about her health problems.

I’m on the Betty Ford side of the spectrum.

I'll ask again - why do you (plural - not just you, R101) need to know? Serious question.

“Doing what I can to stay cancer free is now my focus” is an odd formulation. I doubt this is an accident. It certainly might be read as “I am cancer free (or in remission) and will now try to stay that way” or it might be read as more aspirational. To me it suggests that her doctors are not optimistic.

No matter what any of us think, it's her body and her illness and the decision to reveal her diagnosis is hers alone.

Duh.

Did you come up wth that on your own r104?

R100, I’ve had thyroid cancer and breast cancer. Fortunately I am currently in remission from both following treatment. ‘No evidence of disease’ (NED) seems to be the preferred term— I doubt that my oncologist would ever tell me that I am ‘cancer-free’, and I would hope that whoever is treating the Princess of Wales would refrain from using that expression. There’s no reliable way to determine that anyone is 100 percent free of cancer. One of the many awful parts of a cancer diagnosis is the fact that you are forced to live with this uncertainty forever. I asked my oncologist about how to deal with not knowing, and she said “Live your life.” Something I try to keep in mind.

I'm very happy for her, and grateful on her behalf.

[QUOTE]The ending wasn't ominous

Tell us more about a cancer diagnosis without having three young children, please. TIA 🙏

R65, I think her hair looks thinner, but it does look like hers and not a wig. I've read that it depends on the chemo drugs as to whether one loses hair or not, as not all drugs cause it. Also, cold caps are said to help with preventing the hair loss, so she might have tried that.

I was also surprised that she used the term "cancer free" as that usually doesn't apply until ~5 years remission or NED.

Maybe it’s soft tissue sarcoma and the expectation is that it’ll keep coming back hence the doing what I can to remain cancer free wording.

Loved the vid. Gorgeous settings.

Great…does this mean I’m not featured at the top of the Arts & Entertainment pages for the rest of this week?!!

Here’s a little starter for those of you new to the “Die, Kate, die!” threads:

She is obviously wearing one of those new Post Chemo Thinned Hair Look wigs - she’s completely bald under there.

My neighbor’s veterinarian’s fuck buddy just finished chemo and looks terrible - it’s all a ploy for sympathy. There’s nothing wrong with her.

The whole family except Kate is wearing her signature color of blue. Coincidence? I think not! She is signaling either her imminent demise or divorce. Or both.

No skinny jeans for Kate in this video - only loose dresses. Can you say “permanent colostomy bag”?

Much loved as she is, the Princess of Wales has zero constitutional significance. If her father-in-law - the Head of State - hasn’t been obliged to reveal detail on his cancer diagnosis, why should she on hers?

Apart from satisfying the ghouls, desperate for a royal funeral, that is.

The video is a little over-produced and about twice a long as it needed to be. Other than that, lovely and I'm happy to hear there's room for lots of hope.

R25 you must be a culty cunt

Just found one site that said she had 90 public engagements in 2022. That means she had 75% of days of the year with zero public engagements. (or more than 75%, assuming some days had more than one stop...)

So "stepping back" from that low level of work is extreme privilege no matter how one looks at it. I don't begrudge her but she is not exactly hand in hand with the vast majority of cancer patients who still have to worry about paying the bills.

Campaigning for more paid leave and other support for ALL cancer patients might be a good project for her in the future.

R118, careful there! I said something similar in one of the other Kate threads and got ripped a couple new assholes.

[quote]So "stepping back" from that low level of work is extreme privilege no matter how one looks at it.

The Princess of Wales is extremely privileged??

**gasps in shock and surprise**

[quote] So "stepping back" from that low level of work is extreme privilege no matter how one looks at it. I don't begrudge her but she is not exactly hand in hand with the vast majority of cancer patients who still have to worry about paying the bills.

This tiresome stuff again?

Oh my! Surely, you can't be serious! Next, you'll be informing me the Great Lakes are comprised of water.

Of course she isn't like the vast majority of cancer patients. They don't occupy a singular position among the people of Earth. They're not gossip worthy.

One can acknowledge that obvious fact, while at the same time wish and hope that, when it comes to access to good medical care and support care everybody would have the same access.

There is one Princess of Wales. She's famous. She's privileged. She's wealthy. Let's see, did I cover it all?

That whole tone of I'm so much deeper than you because I point out how privileged she is, is just annoying.

Letting the kids climb up on that pile of logs was insane.

I thought that, too, r122.

George is really growing up, he seems to be a foot taller. I still think of him as that chubby little toddler!

R123 why? Thats why kids are so soft nowadays.

R71. Holy shit! Harry and Meghan are truly sick. Didn’t they pull a similar stunt recently—to compete with some big royal news? Might have been that idiot launching her stupid store with no products just after Kate released the video where she announces her cancer. Its hard to believe that the drop of the Polo series today is coincidental.

Nothing with the Sussexes is coincidental. They are trash. She has dragged him down to her level.

[quote] Just found one site that said she had 90 public engagements in 2022. That means she had 75% of days of the year with zero public engagements. (or more than 75%, assuming some days had more than one stop...)

90 divided by 365 (no weekends, no holidays) is indeed 25%, but who really counts work days like that?

Based on a 4.5-day work week, there are 234 work days in a year.

90 divided by 234 = 38%. She's at a public engagement 38% of her work days.

62% of her days could be "office days," dealing with emails, scheduling, etc. You also probably have to do a little bit of research for each of these public appearances, even if it's someone just briefing you on something.

R114 put the crack pipe down and pray for brains.

I'd suggest that you are rather familiar with the crack pipe yourself, R129.

You might want to come up with a couple of new insults, R129 - "pray for brains" and "cunt" are, like you, getting a little tired.

^^^ along with "put down the crack pipe", of course!

You're a faux pompous English twat, R129.

R131 do yourself a favour, change out of your vest and pants, take a shower and take a walk outside of your trailer park. Try talking to some actual real life people, and that will hopefully open up your mind a little. The voices in your head telling you daft things are not real friends.

Give it a try, you have nothing to lose.

R119, that's because you were talking shit, just as r118 is. There is much more involved in the work Catherine does than just the public appearance itself. Similarly, William's homelessness project involves a lot more work than just a visit here and there.

Is "faux pompous" even a thing, r131? How does that work?

It's usually found in lower middle class English gay men, attempting, but failing, to condescend.

Thanks r135, I just realised what faux pompous means - your post is a perfect example of it, and it manages to fail to condescend as well, even though the two are not exactly the same thing.

Uh o. These South London queens got time today.

I have mentioned in previous threads that I have a friend who works in an advisory position with the P and P of Wales (since they were the D and D of Cambridge). My friend works with them as an outside consultant, not an employee. According to my friend, both W and C work a lot even when they are not publicly seen. They show up to meetings informed and prepared, have strong points of view on each of their projects, and are both intelligent and hard workers. The public doesn't see this, of course, so they are labelled as lazy. Does your boss see everything you do?

R35 I wasn’t sure if I was watching Kate Bush or Kate Middleton in that vid

[quote]If her father-in-law - the Head of State - hasn’t been obliged to reveal detail on his cancer diagnosis, why should she on hers?

I suspect this is why she's not saying publicly what cancer she has. Charles may have a form of cancer known for a low survival rate, and if Catherine keeps her diagnosis private, there is much less pressure on Charles to make his diagnosis public, thus avoiding the public drama of a terminally ill king.

R140, I never thought of that. I believe you have hit the nail on the head. I've been one of those opining she should publicly disclose. But now, I think maybe not, and that makes sense.

A proctocolectomy with ileostomy is sometimes recommended for severe Crohn's disease and especially if there is dysplasia (pre-malignant) changes. Often, cancer is discovered on pathology after the surgery. I hope this isn't the case, but this would make sense with her "planned abdominal surgery" and very long convalescence in the hospital.

I’m not saying that she doesn’t have Crohn’s disease, but there’s only that one yahoo news article that says that she has it and there’s a good chance the writer made a lazy mistake since there’s another woman with the same name who does have it and has a social media presence focused on the disease.

I didn't realize there had been any reports that she had Crohn's disease. I'm just considering what type of planned (but not urgent) abdominal surgery would keep someone hospitalized for 13 days. Something like a hysterectomy is 3-5 days in the UK (sometimes just overnight in the US). NHS keeps proctocolectomy with ileostomy up to 2 weeks. That also a surgery that might be done and later found to be malignant (however there are other surgeries where malignancy is found on pathology, too). It's also something that she might be more reluctant to disclose. If she wishes to keep it private, we may never know.

Gotcha R144 and as most DL’ers know I have Crohn’s and I think it’s a good guess as well.

R21, it coulda been ass cancer!

- Farah

Some kind of bowel disorder that made her more susceptible to cancer would make sense in terms of the extended break. She has been sick for a while, just not with cancer. So maybe the cancer was caught very early. But because she was already ill for some time she was exhausted and already underweight and just wanted a break and to deal with it privately.

If she was in her 60’s or 70’s with “regular” breast or colon cancer and had a pretty strong all-clear maybe she’d disclose her medical details. But this is probably either something non-cancerous and ongoing (with possible bathroom issues) that she doesn’t want everyone talking about or something with a high potential for relapse and she doesn’t want her kids to know.

My mom went through both breast and colon cancer. She was already old enough not to be working, but she sure as shit didn’t take nine months off from life either time. Other women I’ve know have worked through their cancer treatments and continued to manager their homes and families. It’s possible Kate is lazy, but lazy enough to milk a cancer diagnosis to this degree? Nah. I think she was / is very ill.

The video seems cheesy just from the stills. Three minutes of that must be over the top but I guess they want to give people something to wrap this up and realized they screwed up initially by not being more straightforward, not about the details (which she doesn’t need to disclose) but by not justifying the timeline and using a doctored photo. And, yeah, that photo. Why did they do that? she was probably so underweight at one point that it couldn’t be concealed with normal makeup, lighting and filters. It’s interesting that her hair appears all natural in the video when for years she was using extensions. I think it would have been very normal for her to go back to extensions (and suspect she will at some point) but it seems like a conscious choice to highlight the natural hair. They want to come across as honest. You can be private and honest. Private and lying is how they came across initially.

I think the more important question here is, when was the last time Will got some pussy? I'm assuming Kate isn't in any shape to put out between the bowel problems and the chemo, not that they were even fucking to begin with since it's been reported they have separate rooms.

If she has had on-going bowel issues even before the cancer, that might explain her low number of engagements over the years.

Maybe she has always needed to stay close to a bathroom or maybe there was always only a certain window of time per day where she felt comfortable not being close to a bathroom. Although up until her last appearance last Christmas, she did wear a lot of white and loved her skinny jeans which contradicts bathroom issues.

IDK, just armchair medical speculating and diagnosing here on the DL Unlicensed, Unregulated TeleHealth site.

[quote] I think the more important question here is, when was the last time Will got some pussy?

I would be surprised if William WASN'T having sex with someone other than Kate. Katherine may even know of it and doesn't object.

Isn't it taken as a matter of course in that milieu that, after some years of marriage, extramarital sex is to be expected, as long as the rules are followed?

Besides, William seems to be one of those smart guys who has the common good sense to have had a vasectomy; No babies "born on the wrong side of the blanket " for him.

Article from DM, I've unpaywalled it. Make of it what you will. I agree with the author.

That’s great news. I hope Kate Middleton does soon too!

I didn't think the Fail allowed non-worshipful W&K articles.

[quote]Article from DM...

Maybe journalists could just leave this alone and not review it as if it's entertainment. What's the point of critiquing a wife and mother's video communicating that she's hopefully survived a frightening diagnosis? Her family decided to make the announcement this way, so be it. Just consider it informative for those interested in what happened and how she's doing, and then let it be. Everyone deals with shocking news, fear, difficult medical procedures, concern for their kids, etc., in their own personal way and maybe it isn't appropriate to publicly speculate or judge that part of someone's life for ratings. Seems unkind.

It was weird. People have the right to call it what it is, without seeming to be assholes.

The style of her first message was appropriate to the subject at hand. It was transparent and unaffected. She got a lot of good will from that.

I don't know why she/they felt the need to layer on fakery and images of logs and ferns and emotional background music. It's insulting to people suffering from cancer that don't have a glam squad behind them. It was cringeworthy.

R103, it can only be aspirational for now. She has to go five years without a reoccurrence before she can be in remission.

I'm not insulted, concern troll.

They released an overly produced three minute video. We are allowed to critique it. She could have sat on a bench and read a statement. Her choice.

I don’t think the video is that bad and I don’t think it’s receiving heavy criticism. I think it was designed for a fawning audience, and it shows.

[quote] Besides, William seems to be one of those smart guys who has the common good sense to have had a vasectomy

I highly doubt William got a vasectomy.

And yes, the video was overly long and over-produced, like an advert for life insurance.

I didn't like the part in the video where William is straddling her on the blanket and kissing her on the neck. That was tacky.

Otherwise, it should have been a tad shorter and no wardrobe changes. Maybe just following them walking to and setting up a picnic on the grass while Catherine did the voiceover. Although the scene playing cards with her parents was nice. Maybe her parents could have instead been seen joining the picnic at the end since they were their major support system through this.

[quote]“Doing what I can to stay cancer free is now my focus” is an odd formulation.

I someone who was already a health nut & was diagnosed with cancer (while I'm a lazy pig & don't have any such issues) and she's now rabid about the food she eats, the water she drinks - everything she puts in her body & exposes herself too. That's the wording she uses too - like "how did I, OF ALL PEOPLE get cancer! Well, I'm going to make damn sure that it doesn't come back!!" So I'm guessing that's where Kate is coming from - being an even more of a rabid health nut that she likely already was.

[quote] Maybe just following them walking to and setting up a picnic on the grass while Catherine did the voiceover.

Uh, no.

Many years ago, a friend of mine's daughter was battling cancer and they were having a bone marrow drive for her. She appeared at the event. People later criticized the event saying that she didn't look sick enough to need a marrow transplant.

Sadly, she died within a month of the drive.

Moral of the story is that not everybody that is ill looks like they are.

I'm a bone marrow donor. I registered about 20 years ago. So far, no calls.

Go Catherine, you’re such a doll!

[quote] Also, cold caps are said to help with preventing the hair loss, so she might have tried that.

If your kind of chemo works by killing off fast growing new cells, your hair will go, cold cap or no cold cap.

She usually has extensions anyway.

If the video were 4o seconds shorter, there would be criticism that it was too brief and rushed for such a weighty subject. If William wasn't so affectionate, then some would be saying William didn't show enough affection, was cold, distant. If the video had just shown them with the kids having a picnic, then there would be comments about what a weird choice that is and how it felt scripted. Etc., etc.

This is why they just do what feels right for them.

Is she dead yet?

It’s a goodbye message to her children.

I’m sure this is the kind of thing the monarchy has to do to survive, and people would find it weird if Catherine and William dressed and behaved like Philip and Elizabeth. Nonetheless, a royal family that’s like the rest of us isn’t very interesting or inspiring.

Maureen Connolly did it better—see her farewell in those last five minutes below…

The video is fine. I didn't watch it 100 times like some of these critics so I can't remember a huge pile of logs so I wasn't offended by them.

Tbe Where's Kate cult must be elated to view the vid! Prayers answered.

The Daily Heil has a hard core of loonies on its forum who despise Kate for being middle class.

Glad she is on the mend. I think Catherine is a beautiful woman.

[quote] Catherine is a beautiful woman.

R175, this was beautiful.

[quote]I agree with the author.

OK but you should know Liz Jones is CA-RAZY.

[quote]R158 They released an overly produced three minute video. We are allowed to critique it.

I was referring to a journalist reviewing the production value of the video rather than simply reporting on the message of the video, which is the story. I wasn't referring to message board discussions.

[quote] I didn't like the part in the video where William is straddling her on the blanket and kissing her on the neck. That was tacky.

I missed that part. Straddling her is over the top.

She does not need to reveal the type of cancer she has. She is not chasing votes or plugging a book. She has a right to privacy, which some people on here do not seem to comprehend.

[quote] She does not need to reveal the type of cancer she has. She is not chasing votes or plugging a book. She has a right to privacy, which some people on here do not seem to comprehend

Who said she needed to reveal the type of cancer? Which posts?

Given MAGA's slavish devotion to all things Trump, I wonder if fried cat will now become some delicacy to show that Dear Leader was right: Cat really IS the new white meat!

R181 scroll to the top of this thread. Read the responses until yours.

You’ll find plenty.

Don’t be lazy.

I did, R183. I saw one that suggested it would be nice if she shared as a way to help other people with the same illness. But it wasn’t really critical of her choice not to. I saw no others. And I’m not the one making the bullshit accusation. You made a claim, back it up.

[quote] I suspect she will reveal the type of cancer she's had in time. It will be a while, but I do think she will be more open about it with this video being the first step. I suspect she will become a great support to those fighting cancer in the UK. King Charles is the current Patron of Macmillan, but I wouldn't be surprised if Catherine takes it on at some stage when she's ready to.

I went back and checked yet again and this is the post I was thinking of and it actually doesn’t really make a very strong suggestion that she should disclose, just hypothesizes that she might and the overall tone is supportive.

There is a post at R58 that says it’s weird to release something like this but not just for out and say what kind of cancer. So that’s one. Out of 100+.

Very few people ever said she had an obligation to disclose details. But that fantasy was used as a defense against criticisms of how poorly the situation was originally handled.

There are quite a few posts speculating about the type of cancer. Her business.

It not her business when they put it out, stop saying anything if you don't want comments, the entitlement of a person who just spread her legs to a husband who does NOTHING and was given EVERYTHING, it doesn't make sense today yet they persist with the ridiculous tradition of a fucking monarchy, stupid Brits.

R187 are you British?

R187 sounds like an embittered colonial to me. Let it go, it’s in the past.

Speculating is not asking her to disclose.

No r189, you're completely wrong, gay man, you put it out, you get what you get, or shut the fuck up, it's simple, everyone wants to tell everybody, then bitch and complain, you signed up for it, the BRF is a show like the Housewives, like a Hollywood movie, bitch gets paid well too, to be the royal sow pumping out kids. They should call the wonky eyed guy on the housewives, he has no shame either.

Shut up asshole. More reliably, onto ignore you go

Who is the stupid clown at R187 R191 ?

The clown at R187 and R191 is best dealt with through the FF button. Eventually it gets timed out then grey lined and red tagged. It then surfaces using one of its many sock puppets but at least there’s some peace in the interim.

There is some major alcohol and/or meth use going on there. A bit sad - pathetic, really.

I wanted to think about this a few days because I have a favourable view of Kate, William, the British monarchy and constitutional monarchy as a system of government.

I didn't like the video. Too soapy. Too contrived. Not fatal, but I think it was a schmaltzy miss. Idea was understandable but the execution got the tone wrong.

I know. That horrible tone about hope through pain, strength of family and offering a hand is totally contrived.

[quote] There are quite a few posts speculating about the type of cancer. Her business.

How dare people speculate about a celebrity's private business on a gossip forum, of all places!

Firstly, she is not a celebrity, R197. She is famous - people like you don’t understand the difference.

She is famous as a side effect of who she is but the point of royalty is that they don’t pursue fame or celebrity as this never works out (refer Sussex, Duke and Duchess of).

She owes nothing to anybody, including you, about her health, that she doesn’t want made known.

I have now asked this question four times in the past week on this and other threads, and have always been met with a deafening silence: Why is it so important to you to know what type of cancer she has and what her prognosis is?

You seem quite invested in this so I am sure that you can provide a measured and cogent response. Over to you.

R198, there is no difference between a celebrity or someone who is famous. In fact, the Oxford dictionary describes a celebrity as someone who is famous. You can be a celebrity by choice or not, doesn’t matter. That said, the only reason we care about Kate is because we are nosy and she’s a celebrity. Just because she’s a royal doesn’t mean we lose interest. That doesn’t mean she owes us anything, but sorry, we are just a bunch of nosy people and this is a gossip message board.

No cogent answer, then? Just as I expected.

R200, what the fuck are you expecting? This isn’t Latin study, it’s just gossip. If she were Jill Biden we’d be just as interested. If you think we shouldn’t talk about it, get your ass out of this thread. What makes her any different from anyone else with notoriety? I’ll tell you. Nothing.

All good R201 - you responded exactly as I expected. Have a lovely weekend!

R201 ignored "people like you don’t understand the difference".

[quote] Have a lovely weekend!

You, too! BYE!

Well, r203, please explain the difference. Who deserves scrutiny and who doesn’t? Break it down for us.

I already have, R205 - if you can’t read and interpret then that’s a shame but it’s not my place to educate the stupid.

Ah, just another late night on DL....

There is actually very little difference between celebrity and famous. Celebrity is a newer term that usually implies famous with a positive public image while famous is a more neutral term (but could also potentially be a positive image making it analogous to celebrity). You are really splitting hairs to draw a distinction between thr two terms in American or British English.

How is demanding to know what type of cancer someone has reasonable "scrutiny", r205?

"Celebrity" implies fame for the sake of fame and is based on mass media promotion. It's more applicable to entertainment and sports than to constitutional figures. Celebrities rely on the media, including social media, to keep them in the public eye. Catherine has just done the opposite of all this by dropping out of the public eye, not bowing to the huge media pressure to give them a stream of constant content, and only giving updates in her own way when she feels the time is right.

Politicians can be world famous, but they are not celebrities. Similar with figures such as supreme court judges, central bankers and heads of organisations.

[quote] Firstly, she is not a celebrity, [R197]. She is famous - people like you don’t understand the difference.

[quote] She is famous as a side effect of who she is but the point of royalty is that they don’t pursue fame or celebrity as this never works out (refer Sussex, Duke and Duchess of).

Word for word with r198, and r210.

Julia Roberts, Benedict Cumberbatch, at Wimbledon, as celebrities, are the ones who stand and applaud upon Catherine entering, not the other way around. That's the difference between celebrity and royalty.

The BRF have a UK Constitutional position such that, if you embody a place in the Royal family, as does Catherine, Princess of Wales, it's inherent, as such, that you're famous. Celebrityhood as a goal isn't part of that.

That's why I went "Ruh-roh" when Markle's then-friends hosted that baby shower for her in NY. Markle eagerly bathed in the paparazzi tawdriness of it and the Celebrity A List Show-Folk Trash guests (where are they by the way? I'll bet Amal Clooney now cringes at the video of her prominently sashaying into the hotel front-door).

If you're a mere celebrity, the coverage of that shower was a major PR win and there is not one damn thing wrong with that.

But the BRF aren't "celebrities". Credible reports stated that Q E II cast a raised eyebrow at that shower, but since Markle was in "the learning stage", it was probably not remarked upon. "She'll catch-on" was probably still the hope.

Well, Markle never caught-on. It's telling of what a harbinger that shower was in that that she STILL hasn't caught-on and hasn't achieved, on her own, whatever it is she wants with regard to her fame.

Think of it -what a missed opportunity if the Sussexes would have toughed it out, found a way to come to terms with King Charles and William, and were still working Royals, right now, the Sussexes would be the ones with the duty to mingle with all the "A Listers", at some Charity Gala Movie Premier thing.

William and Catherine, of course, would have right of first refusal on the truly "A List" events but I find it very easy to believe that they would have gladly handed a lot of those off to the Sussexes.

They know they're work. And they know that as a Royal it's part of the job to mingle with celebrities but not BE a celebrity.

Which celebrities inspect the passing out at the Royal Air Force graduation ceremony and give speeches to the new officers about the future threats to the country?

R212 still not getting it. Maybe you should give up trying to understand what is beyond your comprehension - and that’s cool. Nobody other than you cares what you think. Run along, R212.

What you on about, r213?

R213 has her panties in a bunch because he thinks Kate is not a celebrity, but just “famous” and thereby, we are all assholes for wanting to gossip about her.

Btw, she does not owe anyone any info about her cancer diagnosis, but this is an effing gossip thread. If you feel so strongly about it, get out of the thread and stop discussing it.

I liked the video. It's pretty clear the RF doesn't want to continue the Queen's over the top privacy. I'm not saying they should tell the world everything, but keeping everyone completely in the dark just allows rumours to take hold.

Besides, if she'd just released a photo and a statement, she'd have been accused of being dead and photoshopping photos.

When an extensively and obviously edited photo was released she was accused of photoshopping and being dead. When apparently unedited photos were released, she wasn’t.

[quote] William and Catherine, of course, would have right of first refusal on the truly "A List" events but I find it very easy to believe that they would have gladly handed a lot of those off to the Sussexes.

MARY. I'm breathless!

I have to say, the wigmaster on that shoot deserves the EGOT.

R217 It was still nuts that people genuinely thought a photoshopped image meant she was definitely dead. Surely it's not just me that thinks that?!

It was known before that debacle that she liked photography, as she had released several images she'd taken in the past. Most photographers edit images before releasing them to the public and, as an amateur photographer, it's not exactly a leap to think she might not be very good at photo editing.

There were just so many other explanations that were more likely than "she's dead!" So many people are crazy nowadays.

She’s dead, Mr. Finch.

—Heck Tate

There is so much crazy in these threads, but the craziest has to be the idea Catherine was receiving treatment in Houston.

Yeah, one of the most famous and scrutinised women on the planet is making transatlantic trips on a weekly basis completely unnoticed.

With the right wigs and extensions, anything is possible. Look at Margareita Killenbaumer.

I agree, R220. It was nuts to jump to she’s dead. But I disagree that there were many other plausible explanations. Very few scenarios would preclude releasing a snapshot of Kate reading to one of the kids or some other pose that even a very ill post surgery patient could manage. It was very strangely handled and her complete disappearance led people to fill the void with extreme theories. Death didn’t make sense only because eventually the truth would come out and there would be a huge backlash.

That’s why I don’t think the Houston story was that crazy. It would explain the Frankenstein photo and why, other than that photo, she dropped out of sight so completely. I don’t think she would go back and forth, but it’s possible she holed up there for a while, with or without the kids. It couldn’t be disclosed without revealing the seriousness of her condition and inviting criticism for not using British healthcare. I’m not saying I believe it, I just think it’s possible. Another possibility is that she was so ill and underweight even the best lighting, makeup, and editing would not be able to hide it.

R224 It's completely ridiculous. It's just Americans imagining things about a country they know nothing about. You think we don't have private cancer specialists? It's not like she'll be waiting around at her local hospital for treatment. You think she'd have been able to travel unseen to fucking Texas? You fantasists are ludicrous.

But he doesn't believe it, R225, he just thinks it's possible.

Bravo R225!

R224, please explain exactly how the Houston story explains the "Frankenstein photo."

You're looking for logic from R224? Good luck with that!

[quote] Firstly, she is not a celebrity, [R197]. She is famous - people like you don’t understand the difference.

That's because there [bold]is[/bold] none, brainiac.

Merriam-Webster's definition of celebrity:

[quote]celebrity

[quote]noun

[quote]ce·​leb·​ri·​ty sə-ˈle-brə-tē

[quote]plural celebrities

[quote]1 : the state of being celebrated : fame

[quote]The actress lived a life of celebrity.

[quote][bold]2: a famous or celebrated person[/bold]

[bold]Many celebrities attended the awards ceremony.[/bold]

[quote] "Celebrity" implies fame for the sake of fame and is based on mass media promotion.

No, that's YOU who claim that. That's not in the actual dictionary definition of the term.

You do not get to decide that words have meanings just because you want them to have those meanings.

"Brainiac"? Are you twelve? You'll be calling someone a "nimrod" next.

R228, She was in Houston, so nobody could take a photo of her with her kids. It might also be challenging to get a background correct. I think they generally don’t release photos of their interior living spaces? And their living spaces might be hard to fake.

Again, I’m not saying that’s what happened, I just don’t get dismissing it as crazy. And it wouldn’t have to be Houston, just someplace that would make it difficult to take a photo of her with the kids without giving away that she wasn’t where she was supposed to be.

R225, your degree of defensiveness indicates that you are the one who suspects the US might be able to provide better care than the UK. Saying I don’t think it’s a completely crazy theory in no way implies I think UK doesn’t have great doctors that could treat her. That’s a huge jump. Some medical centers are known for treating certain types of cancer. That’s all. Or maybe her UK team was collaborating on research with a group in Houston (or wherever) and there were logistical reasons a location outside the UK made sense.

Of all the British royal family, Catherine is the one I vaguely admire, For love, ambition or family pressure, she married into iand obeyed the rules like no other except the former queen. For this she was rewarded with a raging husband, a gay son heir (nothing worng normally except for the headache), a smart bossy girl and a sociopath (ok, just kidding). And cancer.

I wish her well and hope she has the opportunity to make many other cringe vioeos until her older children her ageing queens. But she, or her team, or her husband’s, have absolutely managed her illness in thw worse possible way. She is sick with cancer so not, admittedly, in full possession of herself, but her hushas no excuse.

^ typos gallore, sorry

R233 You are completely insane.

R233 do you work for the Houston Chamber of Commerce? Why are you trying to resurrect this ridiculous story? Do you enjoy making a fool of yourself?

R191 is me, you britsh sow cow, not a sock puppet because I speak the fucking truth, Gay men you need to ff these cunts from the UK, they are about to win, you pussies, because man once in your life, and fuck these bitches up.

It's all fucking British cunts

Hi KGT! Love your new handle!

Serious question - how do you keep track of them all?

I didn't think the idea that Catherine was being seen at MD Anderson in Houston was far fetched. It is the #1 ranking hospital in the world for oncology. There turns out to be no evidence that it is true, but it's certainly not one of those things that stuck out as an obvious conspiracy. It doesn't mean that I think the UK hospitals are bad and can't provide adequate heathcare. The US does happen to excel in specialized research hospitals. King Hussain of Jordan famously came to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, NY for cancer treatment. Going outside of the NHS for specialized treatment doesn't mean that the NHS doesn't provide excellent healthcare for general needs.

Give it a rest, R240 - she was never there. End of story.

[R240] - small correction: The Mayo Clinic is in Rochester, Minnesota.

Did Kate punch up her accent to sound more aristocratic? Her video voice over is like a parody of uptight boarding-school + BRF + RIDING CROP up one's ass. Has she always talked like that?

Have you always "talked like that", R243? You sound like a rube.

^ Hi there, Kate!

R243, yes, she did tone up her accent. If she’s going to run this show—and she’s going to do that if her health holds up—she’s going to look and sound the part.

Oy. The dirty old cunt smell here is deadly.

She won’t “run this show” - her husband will. She’ll be Queen Consort not Queen Regnant.

R248, yes, we know what her title will be, but I think she knows how to get her way.

I don't think she knows how to get her way.

There is no way it wouldn't have broken as a story if she went to the U.S. That story is worth money.

The London Clinic, the private hospital where she had her initial surgery, provides cancer care.

A question for those attacking gossiping on a gossip board - let's say in a few weeks you get a news alert on your phone: "Leaked document reveals Princess of Wales prognosis".

Would you read the article?

Be honest.

Why would I bother? I could just come to Datalounge where there will inevitably be a bunch of clueless Americans analysing the article which will then devolve into the inevitable discussion of wigs, secret Houston trips, imaginary tampon conversations, pegging, colostomy bags and the photoshopping of Prince Louis’s thumb.

R234 don’t apologise for the typos, your post was a pile of shit anyway.

Catherine has most likely been receiving care from the Royal Marsden which is a world-renown cancer care hospital offering both NHS and private care. I know several people who have received care there and it is excellent.

[quote]Why would I bother? I could just come to Datalounge

If this upsets you so much, why do you engage? Honest question - what precisely are you trying to achieve?

Good that she is cancer free, of course there will be follow up examinations to be sure she remains cancer free.

I do believe she is in what is called remission.

No one has said she’s cancer free.

She herself said that she is doing what she can to stay cancer free, r258.

I'm headed over to Celebitchy now to enjoy the show. This thread is a dead zone of mindless Kate idolators.

R252, lets not forget, gossip isn't actually a good thing. It may be human nature, and I'm here too, but it's also trucking in people's privacy for fun, which if you take a beat and think about it, is pretty small and shitty. I may be a hypocrite but at least I'll be an honest one. I wouldn't want to defend some of the nonsense I post on DL. When in Rome. But I've never gone as low on anybody as some of you go on Kate Middleton and I never would, and believe me, my desire to see the KGT in prison with the rest of her family is strong. The vitriol doesn't make any sense. The cruelty toward Kate is pretty intense.

Now, of course, but what about Meghan?!?!? Well, what about Meghan? The two women could hardly be more different in their approach to largely the same roles in life. The difference is with Meghan, there's proof of what she's done and who she is, mostly by her own hand. So there's as much commentary on what has happened as gossip and speculation. What has happened, vs. what might or may have. With Kate, even if her mother is Mrs. Bennett and she's just a climber, there's no proof, just speculation.

So R252, for me it isn't a question of gossip, it's a question of stubborn stupidity and conspiracy theory thinking. The insistence in clinging to the impractical, to the worst case scenario, the rudeness and cruelty in some of the comments. You have every right to say it, as I have every right to disdain it and say so. There's this curious phenomenon in the last decade that having the internet somehow innoculates you from the thinking world calling you on your bullshit and stupidity. Guess what, just cause it's easier to disseminate, doesn't make it any smarter or tolerable or meritorious.

And yeah, if that thing landed on my phone I would read it. But in commenting, I wouldn't take it as right and proper to celebrate and wish her dead, I wouldn't talk about her husband running off to another woman to get pegged, I wouldn't blame her for getting cancer because she's too thin and I wouldn't start diagnosing her children with various mental and developmental disorders. But then again I guess I'm just an old idolator. With one or two limits to shore up my self-respect.

R260, thanks for the head's up. Feel free to stay. Forever.

[quote]gossip isn't actually a good thing

This is debatable. Gossip (which does not have to be malicious) is a necessary human trait that aids in building community as well as, perhaps counter-intuitively, trust. We all do it, so therefore it must serve a purpose.

Gossip can be good, bad or neutral. I struggle to see how speculating on the health of a famous person who we don't know, won't ever know, and who won't ever read it, can be construed as a bad form of gossip. Most posts here aren't wishing her death.

Some on this thread obviously disagree. They don't need to engage, or if they want to, they could explain why it is they see this particular form of gossip as a bad thing.

Bullshit. When was the last time you gossiped to somebody's face?

Here's Cambridge's definition of gossip:

conversation or reports about other people's private lives that might be unkind, disapproving, or not true:

someone who enjoys talking about other people and their private lives:

to talk about other people's private lives:

A gossip is also someone who enjoys talking about other people’s private lives:

Doesn't hit my definition of community building, but I admire your gymnastics for the sheer determination.

[quote] When was the last time you gossiped to somebody's face?

It can't be gossip if you do it to somebody's face.

Don't take my word for it. Look up the psychology and sociology of gossip. You will find it far more detailed than a dictionary definition.

Malicious gossip isn't a good thing, which is the majority of what's said about Middleton here.

R261, get a fucking blog!

R267: No.